The owner, Bezos, forced the editorial staff to not publish an endorsement of Harris

The editorial staff are in more or less open revolt, and large numbers of subscribers have canceled their subscriptions and committed to not buying from Amazon.

The Russian soldiers talk disdainfully about the incoming North Korean soldiers, codenamed the “K Battalion,” at one point referring to them as “the f**king Chinese.”

Pundits are unclear on how long would be appropriate to speak about a golfer's genitals. But there seems to be consensus that 12 minutes is too long.

"Backsass dampeners are offline, Captain!"

#AbsoluteCandorJaneway

On Friday, the Washington Post’s publisher, Will Lewis, announced that the paper would no longer make endorsements for president—after its journalists had already drafted an endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris. The decision was made by Jeff Bezos, the paper’s owner.

Over a period of several weeks, a Post staffer told me, two Post board members, Charles Lane and Stephen W. Stromberg, had worked on drafts of a Harris endorsement. (Neither was contacted for this article.) “Normally we’d have had a meeting, review a draft, make suggestions, do editing,” the staffer told me. Editorial writers started to feel angsty a few weeks ago, per the staffer; the process stalled. Around a week ago, editorial page editor David Shipley told the editorial board that the endorsement was on track, adding that “this is obviously something our owner has an interest in.”

“We thought we were dickering over language—not over whether there would be an endorsement,” the Post staffer said. So journalists at the Post, in both the news and opinion departments, were stunned Friday after Shipley told the editorial board at a meeting that it would not take a position after all. This represents the first time the Post has sat out a presidential endorsement since 1988.

I mean, your smartphone already knows how to talk on 600 megahertz, 700 megahertz, 800 megahertz, 1.7 gigahertz, 1.9 gigahertz, 2.1 gigahertz, 2.4 gigahertz, 3 gigahertz, 5 gigahertz, 6 gigahertz, etc. I see absolutely no reason it would be unable to talk on 915 megahertz.

Another fired worker, Hossam Nasr, said the purpose of the vigil was both “to honor the victims of the Palestinian genocide in Gaza and to call attention to Microsoft’s complicity in the genocide” because of the use of its technology by the Israeli military.

Nasr said his firing was disclosed on social media by the watchdog group Stop Antisemitism more than an hour before he received the call from Microsoft. The group didn’t immediately respond Friday to a request for comment on how it learned about the firing.

The same group had months earlier publicly called on Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella to take action against Nasr for his public stances on Israel.

Nasr, an Egyptian-raised 2021 graduate of Harvard University, is also a co-organizer of Harvard Alumni for Palestine.

Google earlier this year fired more than 50 workers in the aftermath of protests over technology the company is supplying the Israeli government amid the Gaza war. The firings stemmed from internal turmoil and sit-in protests at Google offices centered on “Project Nimbus,” a $1.2 billion contract signed in 2021 for Google and Amazon to provide the Israeli government with cloud computing and artificial intelligence services.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/31690333

Canada, the US and the UK all suffer the consequences of winner-take-all voting systems that distort election results, polarize politics and shut voters out.

In this webinar, leading experts and campaigners for proportional representation from Canada, the US, and the UK, discuss the issues each country has with their winner-take-all elections, how transitioning to proportional representation can help address these issues, and what the routes to reform in each country look like.

Co-sponsored by:

Fair Vote Canada: https://www.fairvote.ca/ ProRep Coalition (California): https://www.prorepcoalition.org/ Make Votes Matter (UK): https://makevotesmatter.org.uk/

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/45794384

I've come across bad news that my home state has passed a really shitty law regarding trans people. Are there things I can do to help change this and all of the other shitty policies and attitudes at home?

Canada, the US and the UK all suffer the consequences of winner-take-all voting systems that distort election results, polarize politics and shut voters out.

In this webinar, leading experts and campaigners for proportional representation from Canada, the US, and the UK, discuss the issues each country has with their winner-take-all elections, how transitioning to proportional representation can help address these issues, and what the routes to reform in each country look like.

Co-sponsored by:

Fair Vote Canada: https://www.fairvote.ca/ ProRep Coalition (California): https://www.prorepcoalition.org/ Make Votes Matter (UK): https://makevotesmatter.org.uk/

Global News recently reported that the Progressive Conservative Party will begin nominating candidates this month, the latest sign that Premier Doug Ford is considering a snap vote.

In 2022, the PCs formed a second “false majority” government after winning just 41% of the vote. Given that progressive parties—the OLP, ONDP, and GPO—received a combined 54% of the vote, it seems Ontario’s democratic majority was once again denied its right to govern.

What made the situation even more dire, however, was the historically low voter turnout of 43%, which meant Ford was handed a majority government by a meagre 18% of eligible voters. These results spell a crisis of legitimacy for our democracy, especially when it comes to the legislation passed by such a government.

For instance, in 2019, the PCs passed Bill 124, which capped salary increases for broader public sector workers (including teachers and nurses) to 1% per year for three years. It was later deemed unconstitutional by the Ontario Court of Appeal, which ruled that it violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms with respect to unionized employees.

Here is a list of other legislation passed by the PCs that might not have come into force under PR:

1. Bill 60: Your Health Act (May 2023) allowed private clinics to conduct more OHIP-covered surgeries despite critics warning that it would lead to a two-tiered system. At the time, the NDP said it presented 74 amendments to the Your Health Act to the committee, but none were accepted or even considered by the PCs.
2. Bill 3: Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act (Sept 22) gave mayors more power by allowing them a veto on bylaws passed by council, the ability to hire and dismiss senior managers, and stewardship over the city budget. While municipal powers are determined by the provincial government, the bill is widely seen as a continuation of the erosion of municipal powers and councillors, who are elected by citizens to exercise their democratic will.
3. Bill 39: Better Municipal Governance Act (2023) extended “strong mayor” powers to other municipalities. Opposition parties were critical of how it allowed mayors to pass certain bylaws with just one-third of council support.
4. Bill 23: More Homes Built Faster Act (2022) reduced development fees (to boost construction) despite significant opposition from environmental groups, municipal governments, and Indigenous communities.
5. Bill 7: More Beds, Better Care Act (2022) allowed hospitals to free up hospital beds by discharging elderly patients to long-term care homes without their consent. The bill faced backlash for infringing on patient rights.

Finally, while not a legislative bill, the Greenbelt land swap scandal raised significant issues in 2023 when the Ford government came under scrutiny for opening up previously protected Greenbelt land for development against the will of elected municipal councillors. The Auditor General’s report revealed that the process disproportionately favoured certain developers...